Transcript No Slide Title

New Approaches to Teacher
Compensation: Research Results
and Policy Applications
Herb Heneman & Tony Milanowski
Consortium for Policy Research in
Education
Wisconsin Center for Education Research
University of Wisconsin-Madison
CPRE Work on Teacher
Compensation Innovations
1991: Odden & Conley, “A New Teacher Compensation System to Promote
Productivity”
1995-97: Exploratory design meetings with National Board for Professional
Teaching Standards, leading edge states & districts, national teacher
organizations
1997: Odden & Kelley, Paying Teachers for What They Know and Can Do (2nd
ed. 2002, Corwin Press)
1996-2005: Research on school-based performance awards & knowledge &
skill-based pay; National Conference.
2007: Odden & Wallace, How to Create World Class Teacher Compensation
(Freeload Press)
www.wcer.wisc.edu/cpre
Waves of Teacher Compensation
Innovation Since 1980
“Merit Pay”
– variable annual pay increases based on principal’s subjective
evaluation of last year’s performance
– Problems with evaluation, funding
– Programs died out except in a few wealthy districts
Career ladders
- Stipends or raises for taking on extra duties
- Access restricted by some sort of selection process
- 22 states at one time
Waves of Teacher Compensation
Innovation Since 1980
School-based performance awards
- Bonuses provided to all teachers (and others) in a school
when that school achieves pre-established performance
goals
- Sometimes $ given to school for improvements
Knowledge & skill-based pay
- Bonus or pay increase for participating in specified
professional development
- Bonus or pay increase for certification by National Board for
Professional Teaching Standards
- Bonus or base pay increase for demonstrating competencies
in the classroom
Next Wave of Teacher Compensation
Innovations?
 Incentives for teaching in high-need or hard to
staff schools
 Incentives for teaching in shortage areas
 Differentiated pay for teacher leaders
 Pay increases or bonuses for teachers with high
classroom value-added
School-based Performance Awards
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
School level performance pay plan
District or State establishes school-wide goals for student
achievement (level or growth) and other performance
indicators such as graduation, advanced placement, and
attendance rates
Goals are annual or multi-year and require performance
maintenance or improvement (relative to a base, relative to a
standards, or value added)
There are pre-determined bonus amounts and payout criteria
Bonuses paid to teachers and other staff, or into a school
activity fund
Full bonus (typically $500-$1,500) is paid to teachers and
administrators; smaller (often half) bonus paid to other school
staff
Single salary schedule remains intact
Knowledge & Skill-based Pay

Base pay increase or bonus (typically $300 - $3,000) for
competency demonstration
-

skill blocks – technology, student assessment, curriculum unit design,
etc.
portfolio completion
dual certification
graduate degree in subject taught
Base pay increase or bonus for NBPTS certification ($1,000 $15,000)
Base pay increase or bonus for classroom performance
mastery (typically $1,000 - $3,000), as measured by standardsbased teacher evaluation
May involve changes to single salary schedule


-
fewer steps
fewer or redefined lanes
performance-linked career ladder progression
Combined Plans – Denver ProComp
Additional pay on top of salary index amount ($34,200) for:

Knowledge and skills (up to $4,762)
-


Standards-based teacher evaluation (up to $1,366)
Market incentives (up to $1,025) for hard-to-staff subjects and
schools
Student growth (up to $2,052)

-


professional development units
graduate degree/national certificates and license
tuition reimbursement
student success in meeting two annual learning objectives
state test score growth
distinguished school
Funded in part by a $25 million referendum on the plan, not timelimited and inflation adjusted over time
Single salary schedule is replaced
CPRE Research on School-based
Performance Awards



Sites: Charlotte-Mecklenburg, Kentucky,
Vaughn Charter School, Maryland
Timeframe: 1998-2002
Methods: Interviews, surveys, analysis of
motivation-achievement relationship
Theoretical Framework - Teacher
Motivation and Performance Awards
Expectancy
Teacher Effort
Intensity
Instrumentality
School
Achievement
Goals/Targets
Persistence
Focus
Teacher
Consequences
Positive
Enablers
Competencies
Negative
When do performance incentives
motivate?



Teachers perceive that goal achievement leads to
consequences they value (instrumentality)
– Positive (rewards)
– Avoiding negative consequences (sanctions)
– The value of positive consequences must outweigh the
negatives such as stress, less freedom, and working harder.
They understand and accept the goals
They perceive a strong link between their own efforts and
achieving the goals (expectancy)
– They believe they possess the competencies
– They perceive the presence of performance enable
CPRE Research Findings
Motivating Outcomes
- Goal Attainment (e.g., bonus, public recognition)
- Learning (e.g., seeing student achievement improve,
working cooperatively with other teachers)
- Sanctions (loss of pride, state or district intervention)
Demotivating Outcomes
- more pressure & job stress
- putting in more hours
- less freedom to teach things unrelated to goals
CPRE Research Findings
 Expectancy averages
- CMS 62%
- KY 53%
 Instrumentality averages
- CMS 73%
- KY 54%
CPRE Research Findings
Low to moderate motivational impact
-
Small bonus amounts
Limited attention to ‘enablers’ & competencies
Uncertainty about effort-goal link
Uncertainty about funding
 Schools in which teachers had higher levels of
expectancy were more likely to meet performance goals
(one std. dev. increase in expectancy associated with .2-.3 std.
dev. increase in goal attainment)
CPRE Research Findings
Rewards helped focus performance by defining
goals
Focus, but do not drive performance due to low to
moderate motivational impact
May increase turnover in schools identified as
low-performing
CPRE Research Findings on Knowledge
& Skill-Based Pay
Bonus or base pay increase for demonstrating
competencies in the classroom via performance
evaluation
 Knowledge & skills defined by standards-based teacher
performance evaluation systems based largely or in part on
Framework for Teaching
 Primary Sites:
- Cincinnati Public Schools
- Vaughn Next Century Learning Center (LA charter school)
- Washoe County (NV) School District
Secondary : Anoka & La Crescent, MN, Coventry, RI, Newport
News, VA
Research Findings on Knowledge &
Skill-Based Pay
Evaluation ratings predicted value added student
achievement in reading and math
 Teachers accepted the teaching standards used to
evaluate performance, but had mixed reactions on the
fairness and validity of evaluation ratings

 Administrators accept the teaching standards, reported
increased workload in implementing new system, & had
difficulties providing sufficient feedback and coaching
 Implementation glitches were frustrating to teachers and
administrators
Research Findings on Knowledge &
Skill-Based Pay

Impacts on teaching practice were primarily on planning,
classroom management, and attention to state and
district standards
 There was a lack of a broader strategy in the districts to
use the pay system to drive teacher and student
performance improvement
 There was a lack of alignment of human resource
systems (recruitment, selection, induction, mentoring,
professional development, compensation, performance
management, instructional leadership) to the teaching
standards
 Teachers resisted linking the teaching evaluation results
to pay
Research Findings on Knowledge &
Skill-Based Pay
Bonus or pay increase for certification by National Board
for Professional Teaching Standards
 Incentives increased applications for NBPTS certification
 Students of National Board Certified Teachers (NBCT’s) had
higher value-added achievement in reading and math than
students of non NBCT’s in two studies; a third study showed
fewer and smaller positive effects
 NBCT’s are not used much differently than other teachers by
most states & districts
 Rewarding NBPTS certification can be expensive (teacher
preparation time, cost of application, salary increases or
bonuses for certification), raising questions of its costeffectiveness.
Research Findings on Knowledge &
Skill-Based Pay
Bonus or pay increase for participating in specified
professional development
 Little research on these plans; District experience suggests:
- Teachers find them acceptable
- They increase participation in targeted professional
development
- Increased participation builds a cadre of teachers with needed
skills
Guidelines for Policy & Practice

Guarantee Stable and Adequate Funding
- One reason for teacher suspicion of new pay plans is tendency
of states and districts to lose interest in bad budget times.
- Funding need not be just external infusions of new dollars.
Resource reallocation, teacher attrition and reduced backloading of the single salary schedule (Odden & Wallace, 2007).


Provide Competitive Total Compensation
Build Strong Measurement Systems
- Reliability
- Fairness
- Timeliness
Guidelines for Policy & Practice

Gauge Likely Teacher Reactions to Performance
Pay Plans
- Acceptable degree of pay differentiation among
teachers
- Motivation to improve performance
- Fairness of procedures and outcomes
- Acceptance of overall plan
Guidelines for Policy & Practice
Engage the Teachers' Association
 Include Principals and Administrators
 Build Capacity
 Develop a Performance Improvement Strategy
and Plan
 Align Human Resource Systems to the
Performance Improvement Strategy

Strategic HR Alignment
Student Achievement Goals
Performance Improvement Strategy
(Programs, Plans)
Performance Competencies
(What Teachers & Administrators Need to Know & Be
Able to Do)
Human Resource Programs
Recruitment - Selection - Induction - Mentoring
Prof. Development - Compensation - Performance Management Leaders
Guidelines for Policy & Practice:
Implementing the Innovation
1. Identification of a designated "champion" and formal
leader for the plan;
2. Continual engagement by top management with the
plan;
3. Attention to details and "drill down" of plan
requirements to all systems involved;
4. Constant communication with teachers and principals.
5. Conduct a Pilot of the Performance Pay Plan
Looking Forward
 Pay increases or bonuses for teachers whose
individual classrooms show high value-added
Incentives for teaching in high-need or hard to
staff schools
 Incentives for teaching in shortage areas
 Differentiated pay for teacher leaders
Implications for Rewarding Teachers
for Classroom Value-added

Motivational impacts:
- Bonus sizes need to be valuable enough to balance
-
-
increased job demands
Need to address teacher suspicions of achievement 
reward link (instrumentality)
Many teachers don’t believe they can reach a higher
standard of practice (expectancy)
Need to attend to performance enablers

Importance of smooth implementation & teacher
fairness perceptions in maintaining acceptance

Need to address measurement reliability (e.g., small
samples make classroom value-added estimates
unstable)
Implications for Incentives for
Working in High-Need Schools
 Motivational impacts:
- Incentives need to be valuable enough to balance perceived
-
negative working conditions
Need to provide enablers that help educators succeed in
challenging schools
 Reliable definition of “high need” or “hard to staff”
 Need to align HR systems
- Publicize incentives as recruiting tool
- Select high potential teachers
- Professional development tailored to skill needs
Why do we know so little about
teacher pay innovations?
Many didn’t get fully implemented, changed
frequently, or disappeared quickly
No comparison groups, no randomization;
before/after comparisons obscured by other
simultaneous reforms
Policy makers have shown little interest in
evaluation
Will TIF improve the situation?